To my mind, the job of editor is one of the single most important jobs on this site. But sometimes I see reviews that seem to have had no editing at all. (This one, for example: link, which appeared on another thread recently, and which was written by an author who appears not to be active anymore.) What I want to know is: What are the responsibilities of an editor, and how can I leave a helpful and constructive word to the editors I think have done a bad job?
Rating Editors
08/14/2011
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
Quote:
Oh, goodness. That review needs some editing ASAP! I would definitely rate down the editor.
Originally posted by
Lilith's Girl Friday
To my mind, the job of editor is one of the single most important jobs on this site. But sometimes I see reviews that seem to have had no editing at all. (This one, for example: link, which appeared on another thread recently, and which was written
...
more
To my mind, the job of editor is one of the single most important jobs on this site. But sometimes I see reviews that seem to have had no editing at all. (This one, for example: link, which appeared on another thread recently, and which was written by an author who appears not to be active anymore.) What I want to know is: What are the responsibilities of an editor, and how can I leave a helpful and constructive word to the editors I think have done a bad job?
less
08/14/2011
That review in particular did not have an editor. If there was no editor, it came out before the editing/proofreading program came out, therefore there is no editor to evaluate.
You're correct when you said that it had no editing at all - it truly did not. If a review has an editor, there will be a little box at the bottom saying "This review was edited by" or something along those lines, and you will be able to rate on that editor's work.
The responsibilities of an editor are to: correct grammar, make the review properly formatted, and check for other errors. To leave constructive criticism, I suggest either messaging the editor themselves or send a message to one of the higher ups.
You're correct when you said that it had no editing at all - it truly did not. If a review has an editor, there will be a little box at the bottom saying "This review was edited by" or something along those lines, and you will be able to rate on that editor's work.
The responsibilities of an editor are to: correct grammar, make the review properly formatted, and check for other errors. To leave constructive criticism, I suggest either messaging the editor themselves or send a message to one of the higher ups.
08/14/2011
Quote:
There was no editor on that review, why are you using that review as an example?
Originally posted by
Booktease
Oh, goodness. That review needs some editing ASAP! I would definitely rate down the editor.
08/14/2011
The current Editor Program was started in November of last year. The review you linked is from 2 years ago and so pre-dates the current program. I'm not sure what the practice was from back then, but prior to the Editor Program, reviews were edited by EF staff before being posted to the website. Reviews that have gone through the Editor Program will identify the editor underneath the reviewer. Unfortunately, mentors also appear here and are identified as the editor even though they may not be a part of the program.
Here are the current Editor's Guidelines. If you see a review that has been edited but has what you believe are errors, I would suggest you message the editor directly and let them know so that they can make the appropriate corrections.
Also for future reference, I would avoid identifying specific reviews, reviewers, or editors when you are making such comments in the forum. It is generally considered in poor taste to "call out" someone in such a way.
Here are the current Editor's Guidelines. If you see a review that has been edited but has what you believe are errors, I would suggest you message the editor directly and let them know so that they can make the appropriate corrections.
Also for future reference, I would avoid identifying specific reviews, reviewers, or editors when you are making such comments in the forum. It is generally considered in poor taste to "call out" someone in such a way.
08/14/2011
Quote:
Oops. I see! I rated down the reviewer, which I guess would be a similar move-- since it was before there were editors. :-P
Originally posted by
Sir
There was no editor on that review, why are you using that review as an example?
08/14/2011
perhaps when review of this lack lust are spotted someone can be notified and the review in question reviewed itsself for removal. its not usefull and looks poorly on the review program in general. general public makes snap judgements. Just a thought.
08/14/2011
Quote:
This idea has been discussed before and rejected each time. The only time EF would remove a review is if it violated its Terms & Conditions, which obviously that review does not. Is it the most thrilling review in my opinion? No. Does it have some grammatical errors that make it difficult to understand at points? Yes. However, an Edenfantasys staff member approved that review as was practice at the time of it being written (about two years ago) and it was deemed acceptable for the "general public" to read even if it wasn't to every individual's taste.
Originally posted by
LilyLust
perhaps when review of this lack lust are spotted someone can be notified and the review in question reviewed itsself for removal. its not usefull and looks poorly on the review program in general. general public makes snap judgements. Just a
...
more
perhaps when review of this lack lust are spotted someone can be notified and the review in question reviewed itsself for removal. its not usefull and looks poorly on the review program in general. general public makes snap judgements. Just a thought.
less
What kind of precedent is set when we start removing reviews simply because someone finds the "tone" too "lax" or takes issue with some muddled syntax? Really? Just because that review wasn't helpful to you doesn't mean it won't be helpful to someone. Furthermore, I think it reflects poorly on the review program to police the opinions/writing styles of reviewers in the way you are suggesting. A choppy write-up of a vibrator here and there? Not so much in my personal estimation. I also think this kind of policy would discourage new reviewers from applying to the program for fear of ridicule or rejection of the reviews the spend time and energy creating. But that's what's great about EF; you can disagree with me! Let's keep it that way though, eh? Diversity of perspectives and all that.
08/14/2011
Quote:
This has been discussed before here. (ironically, I think it's the same review in question)
Originally posted by
LilyLust
perhaps when review of this lack lust are spotted someone can be notified and the review in question reviewed itsself for removal. its not usefull and looks poorly on the review program in general. general public makes snap judgements. Just a
...
more
perhaps when review of this lack lust are spotted someone can be notified and the review in question reviewed itsself for removal. its not usefull and looks poorly on the review program in general. general public makes snap judgements. Just a thought.
less
It does not look poorly on the review program because the review program is about allowing each reviewer to have their own voice. How would you feel if everyone voted your review "Not Useful" and it was just removed without your knowledge or consent? Also, just because the ones who voted on a review think the review is not useful doesn't mean that the review has no merit at all to anyone.
The integrity of the program is to have reviewers give their honest opinion (even if that opinion is poorly written). The proofreading program was instituted to give the staff a break from editing review to do their other duties.
08/14/2011
Quote:
damn double post
Originally posted by
LilyLust
perhaps when review of this lack lust are spotted someone can be notified and the review in question reviewed itsself for removal. its not usefull and looks poorly on the review program in general. general public makes snap judgements. Just a
...
more
perhaps when review of this lack lust are spotted someone can be notified and the review in question reviewed itsself for removal. its not usefull and looks poorly on the review program in general. general public makes snap judgements. Just a thought.
less
08/14/2011
Quote:
way to read my mind... I was searching for the thread and you beat me to the punch!
Originally posted by
Owl Identified
This idea has been discussed before and rejected each time. The only time EF would remove a review is if it violated its Terms & Conditions, which obviously that review does not. Is it the most thrilling review in my opinion? No. Does it have
...
more
This idea has been discussed before and rejected each time. The only time EF would remove a review is if it violated its Terms & Conditions, which obviously that review does not. Is it the most thrilling review in my opinion? No. Does it have some grammatical errors that make it difficult to understand at points? Yes. However, an Edenfantasys staff member approved that review as was practice at the time of it being written (about two years ago) and it was deemed acceptable for the "general public" to read even if it wasn't to every individual's taste.
What kind of precedent is set when we start removing reviews simply because someone finds the "tone" too "lax" or takes issue with some muddled syntax? Really? Just because that review wasn't helpful to you doesn't mean it won't be helpful to someone. Furthermore, I think it reflects poorly on the review program to police the opinions/writing styles of reviewers in the way you are suggesting. A choppy write-up of a vibrator here and there? Not so much in my personal estimation. I also think this kind of policy would discourage new reviewers from applying to the program for fear of ridicule or rejection of the reviews the spend time and energy creating. But that's what's great about EF; you can disagree with me! Let's keep it that way though, eh? Diversity of perspectives and all that. less
What kind of precedent is set when we start removing reviews simply because someone finds the "tone" too "lax" or takes issue with some muddled syntax? Really? Just because that review wasn't helpful to you doesn't mean it won't be helpful to someone. Furthermore, I think it reflects poorly on the review program to police the opinions/writing styles of reviewers in the way you are suggesting. A choppy write-up of a vibrator here and there? Not so much in my personal estimation. I also think this kind of policy would discourage new reviewers from applying to the program for fear of ridicule or rejection of the reviews the spend time and energy creating. But that's what's great about EF; you can disagree with me! Let's keep it that way though, eh? Diversity of perspectives and all that. less
LOVE YOU!
08/14/2011
Quote:
Well that review in particular was written BEFORE the editing program. So, no one but the writer is responsible for it being poorly written and full of errors.
Originally posted by
Lilith's Girl Friday
To my mind, the job of editor is one of the single most important jobs on this site. But sometimes I see reviews that seem to have had no editing at all. (This one, for example: link, which appeared on another thread recently, and which was written
...
more
To my mind, the job of editor is one of the single most important jobs on this site. But sometimes I see reviews that seem to have had no editing at all. (This one, for example: link, which appeared on another thread recently, and which was written by an author who appears not to be active anymore.) What I want to know is: What are the responsibilities of an editor, and how can I leave a helpful and constructive word to the editors I think have done a bad job?
less
I started that other thread for a totally different reason.
08/14/2011
Quote:
Whatever the reason, the explanations given from EF staff are applicable to that comment as to deleting "not useful" reviews; which is why I referenced it.
Originally posted by
~LaUr3n~
Well that review in particular was written BEFORE the editing program. So, no one but the writer is responsible for it being poorly written and full of errors.
I started that other thread for a totally different reason.
I started that other thread for a totally different reason.
08/14/2011
Total posts: 13
Unique posters: 8